A Comparison Between Combined Ultrasonic and Bipolar Shears to Other Energy-Based Devices in Otolaryngology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Kenny Do, Kurtis Young, Eric Kawana, Jo-Lawrence Bigcas
{"title":"A Comparison Between Combined Ultrasonic and Bipolar Shears to Other Energy-Based Devices in Otolaryngology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Kenny Do, Kurtis Young, Eric Kawana, Jo-Lawrence Bigcas","doi":"10.1177/15533506241313171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Thunderbeat (TB) is a new surgical device that combines ultrasonic and bipolar energy. The objective of this study is to examine how the combined ultrasonic and bipolar shears affect surgical outcomes when compared to other methods.</p><p><strong>Data sources and review methods: </strong>Using the PRISMA guidelines, the researchers used broad search terms in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, which produced a total of 2823 initial results, with years ranging from 1955 to June 2024. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 final studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This meta-analysis analyzes energy-based devices used on patients into 2 major groups: (1) thyroidectomy group and (2) neck dissection group. The researchers found that the use of the TB in thyroidectomies reduces operative time when compared to the Harmonic scalpel (HS) and Ligasure (LS). The pooled mean difference in thyroidectomy operation time for the TB vs HS was -5.77 min (95% CI: -11.07 to -.48, <i>P</i>-value: .03) and for the TB vs LS was -4.41 min (95% CI: -8.86 to .04, <i>P</i>-value: .05). We also found reduced operative time with the use of the TB vs standard electrocautery for neck dissection, where the mean difference was -39.76 min (95% CI: -63.00 to -16.51, <i>P</i>-value: .00). No significant differences were seen in blood loss or postoperative complications when comparing TB to other methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis demonstrated that TB can be equivalent to other energy-based devices and shows potential advantages over traditional electrocautery.</p>","PeriodicalId":22095,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Innovation","volume":" ","pages":"15533506241313171"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506241313171","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Thunderbeat (TB) is a new surgical device that combines ultrasonic and bipolar energy. The objective of this study is to examine how the combined ultrasonic and bipolar shears affect surgical outcomes when compared to other methods.

Data sources and review methods: Using the PRISMA guidelines, the researchers used broad search terms in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, which produced a total of 2823 initial results, with years ranging from 1955 to June 2024. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 final studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Results: This meta-analysis analyzes energy-based devices used on patients into 2 major groups: (1) thyroidectomy group and (2) neck dissection group. The researchers found that the use of the TB in thyroidectomies reduces operative time when compared to the Harmonic scalpel (HS) and Ligasure (LS). The pooled mean difference in thyroidectomy operation time for the TB vs HS was -5.77 min (95% CI: -11.07 to -.48, P-value: .03) and for the TB vs LS was -4.41 min (95% CI: -8.86 to .04, P-value: .05). We also found reduced operative time with the use of the TB vs standard electrocautery for neck dissection, where the mean difference was -39.76 min (95% CI: -63.00 to -16.51, P-value: .00). No significant differences were seen in blood loss or postoperative complications when comparing TB to other methods.

Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrated that TB can be equivalent to other energy-based devices and shows potential advantages over traditional electrocautery.

联合超声和双极剪切器与其他能量型耳鼻喉科设备的比较:系统综述和荟萃分析。
目的:Thunderbeat (TB) 是一种结合了超声波和双极能量的新型手术设备。本研究的目的是探讨与其他方法相比,联合超声波和双极剪如何影响手术效果:根据 PRISMA 指南,研究人员在 PubMed、Embase 和 Web of Science 中使用了广泛的检索词,共产生了 2823 项初步结果,年份从 1955 年到 2024 年 6 月不等。在应用了纳入和排除标准后,最终有 8 项研究被纳入本系统综述和荟萃分析:这项荟萃分析将患者使用的能量设备分为两大组:(1) 甲状腺切除术组和 (2) 颈部解剖组。研究人员发现,与 Harmonic scalpel(HS)和 Ligasure(LS)相比,在甲状腺切除术中使用 TB 可缩短手术时间。TB与HS相比,甲状腺切除手术时间的汇总平均差异为-5.77分钟(95% CI:-11.07至-.48,P值:.03),TB与LS相比,甲状腺切除手术时间的汇总平均差异为-4.41分钟(95% CI:-8.86至.04,P值:.05)。我们还发现,使用 TB 与标准电烧相比,颈部解剖的手术时间缩短了,平均差异为 -39.76 分钟(95% CI:-63.00 至 -16.51,P 值:.00)。TB与其他方法相比,在失血量或术后并发症方面无明显差异:这项荟萃分析表明,TB 可与其他基于能量的设备相媲美,并显示出与传统电烧相比的潜在优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical Innovation
Surgical Innovation 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Innovation (SRI) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal focusing on minimally invasive surgical techniques, new instruments such as laparoscopes and endoscopes, and new technologies. SRI prepares surgeons to think and work in "the operating room of the future" through learning new techniques, understanding and adapting to new technologies, maintaining surgical competencies, and applying surgical outcomes data to their practices. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信